I wonder how much we don’t see.

[Botellines 0]

Quote

Make up your mind... did we target a building several hundred yards away, or did we target the restaurant?

The target was the restaurant in the middle of a residential suburb where some faulty intelligence had located SH and his sons. However the bomb didn´t strike the restaurant but a building block 100 yards away.
At the end, it didn´t really matter where the bomb fell because both the restaurant and the buildings were full of civilians and SH was not anywhere near.
We differ in what level of collateral damage is acceptable. You say that this is war and that any civilian collateral damage is regretable but okay. I see this as an illegal invasion and my my acceptable level of collateral damage is much lower than yours.

[Gawain 0]

Below is the text of O'Reilly's "Talking Points Memo" from his show last night. He has a compelling point about the conduct of the U.S. Marine and no wrong doing on his part. Read it.

Quote

War and the Media
Wednesday, November 17, 2004
By Bill O'Reilly

War and the media: That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."

Millions of Americans have reacted to this video taken inFallujah (search) where a young Marine shot a wounded insurgent inside a mosque. That Marine is now under investigation. But he is innocent, and that will be proven.

Let's take it step by step.

Last night, I had to make a decision whether to show you that video or not. I chose to do it and then provide context. In that way, you could decide about the controversy.

You may remember I did not show the Abu Ghraib(search) pictures, and I was the only national anchorman not to do so. I felt those pictures put our troops in jeopardy and that I could describe the incidents of abuse verbally, which I did.

But combat is different. You have to see it to understand it.

On the tape, the Marine is clearly heard saying, "He's faking he's dead. He's faking he's dead." He said that right before he shot the insurgent. That statement shows the Marine thought the man was a danger.

And he might have been. The day before, the same Marine unit lost one soldier because an insurgent corpse was boobytrapped. Wounded men and even the dead in Iraq can kill you.

The Marine policy of engagement authorizes the use of force when a soldier is presented with a hostile act and -- this is key -- hostile intent. A sudden move by a prone man in a war zone must be taken seriously. One grenade would have killed every Marine in that room and the cameraman as well.

Clearly, the Marine did not come upon the prone insurgents with the intent to harm them. If so, he would have opened up when he entered the room.

This Marine is innocent of any and all wrongdoing, and the videotape proves it.

Now some of you objected to the story even being reported, saying the press has no business in a war zone. That's wrong. The American people decide about which wars to fight, and, in order to make that decision, you need to know the situation. Without the press, you would not know.

But it is correct to say that some military missions should not be covered. But this situation is a legitimate story.

After seeing that video, all of us now know how dangerous and complicated the Iraq conflict is. Those pictures bring the fighting into sharp focus. American soldiers are in grave danger and must protect themselves. Sometimes mistakes will be made, but this is not one of those times.

That Marine protected himself and his squad, and I fully expect him to be not only exonerated but also praised. And, if that does not happen, you will know about it.

And that's "The Memo."

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Botellines 0]

Quote

Again, you don;t know these facts. The victims were PRISONERS, hence the term PRISONER ABUSE.

Does it make it alright? Poles and Jews were also prisoners in the death camps, as well as many muslims at guantanamo bay. Still they are humans. And by the way, most of them were guilty only of being in the wrong place.
Go to your nearest college and sign up for Human Rights 101, it won´t hurt you.

[Darius11 12]

Thank you for your post.
I try to keep an open mind so i took the time and read your post in full. a couple of points

Quote

You may remember I did not show the Abu Ghraib(search) pictures, and I was the only national anchorman not to do so. I felt those pictures put our troops in jeopardy and that I could describe the incidents of abuse verbally, which I did.

Not even going by Mr. O’Reillys history witch we all know where he stands on most issues and his no spine zone usually looks like a tornado.

The statement above tells me that he did not show the pictures because he did not think it would be good for our troops. That tells me he would do what it takes to help the troops in any way he can.
Unfortunately he is a reporter and reporters are supposed to report the truth with out bias.
He fails miserably. For him to act like judge and jury is not right. He is a member of the media just like any other case out there they are not allowed to say if someone is guilty or innocent until it is proven. If I was Fox I would take him off the air but it is all about ratings and he will still voice his personal opinion something no reporter should do.

I also saw the video. I didn’t not see the man move. I saw the marine walk up to him shoot him in the back of the head and then say well he is dead now. Those are the facts that I have.
If the man did not pose an immediate threat he has committed a war crime. If the man he shot posed an immediate threat then he acted accordingly. From what I saw on the video the man didn’t pose a threat.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Gawain 0]

In that regard then, you are drawing a different conclusion than O'Reilly has. Fair enough.

I have not seen an "uncut" copy of the video. However, based on the bare fundamentals of MOUT that I have, these infantrymen are operating in what is likely known as a dynamic breach environment -- meaning anyone encountered is a combatant.

We don't know if the man/insurgent/terrorist was wounded, or if he was even alive.

I'm erring on the side of the Marine until an investigation determines otherwise (in which case a court hearing of some type will convene and determine guilt/innocence/punishment).

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[pajarito 0]

Quote

I'm erring on the side of the Marine until an investigation determines otherwise (in which case a court hearing of some type will convene and determine guilt/innocence/punishment).

Very prudent assessment. Me too.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm erring on the side of the Marine until an investigation determines otherwise (in which case a court hearing of some type will convene and determine guilt/innocence/punishment).

Very prudent assessment. Me too.

not me... there maybe extenuating circumstances but the weight of the evidence so far (the video and statements after) are against him...he might not have 'intended to' but he clearly made a mistake, he has an uphill battle to prove his actions were justified....

direct and indirect '3rd party' observation of combat is a reality of modern warfare... i'd hate to break it to you, but its going to get 'worse' in the near future... anyone with the proper equipment will have near-real time feeds from what will conceivably become nearly every US soldier (and a number of other observation platforms as well) for the near term this will be limited to military commanders.... dont expect it to remain so...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[GQ_jumper 4]

The target was the restaurant in the middle of a residential suburb where some faulty intelligence had located SH and his sons. However the bomb didn´t strike the restaurant but a building block 100 yards away.
At the end, it didn´t really matter where the bomb fell because both the restaurant and the buildings were full of civilians and SH was not anywhere near.
We differ in what level of collateral damage is acceptable. You say that this is war and that any civilian collateral damage is regretable but okay. I see this as an illegal invasion and my my acceptable level of collateral damage is much lower than yours.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

not me... there maybe extenuating circumstances but the weight of the evidence so far (the video and statements after) are against him...he might not have 'intended to' but he clearly made a mistake, he has an uphill battle to prove his actions were justified....

So you're all for judging before knowing all the facts?
Ok...

Quote

direct and indirect '3rd party' observation of combat is a reality of modern warfare... i'd hate to break it to you, but its going to get 'worse' in the near future... anyone with the proper equipment will have near-real time feeds from what will conceivably become nearly every US soldier (and a number of other observation platforms as well) for the near term this will be limited to military commanders.... dont expect it to remain so...

As you put, "I hate to break it to you" but I realize the future of modern warfare includes the development of high tech optics which will allow real-time footage of each soldier. I think this is fantastic and a great idea for command and control purposes for the military. I think it is a terrible idea for the media to have such ready access to this battlefield information.

[GeordieSkydiver 0]

Quote

I think it is a terrible idea for the media to have such ready access to this battlefield information.

It is fully encripted and they wont have access. This technology is already in use with certain units.

They will only be allowed to see what we want them to see, wether its correct intel or red herring at our own discretion.

Lee _______________________________

In a world full of people, only some want to fly, is that not crazy?
http://www.ukskydiver.co.uk

[GQ_jumper 4]

I'd just like to remind everybody of one thing while you all argue the fate of this marine(Hero). He is a citizen of the United States, a country where one is innocent until proven guilty. give him the benefit of the doubt, you don't know what happened before that video, you don't know what his rules of engagement were, and what firefight lead up to that situation. Let the powers that be decide his fate. And remember regardless of whether or not his is right or wrong in this situation, he still volunteered to put himself in harms way so you don't have to. So while your sitting in your home in front of your computer completely safe bashing this young mans reputation, he is ou there fighting for you.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[billvon 3,076]

>They will only be allowed to see what we want them to see, wether
>its correct intel or red herring at our own discretion.

Indeed; we even have a government office (the Office of Strategic Influence) dedicated to spreading misinformation for the benefit of the administration.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Quote

I think it is a terrible idea for the media to have such ready access to this battlefield information.

It is fully encripted and they wont have access. This technology is already in use with certain units.

They will only be allowed to see what we want them to see, wether its correct intel or red herring at our own discretion.

Right...but you know as well as I do how stuff gets leaked to the media. It happens all the time. Surely you've viewed some of the footage here on dz.com that the military probably didn't want shown yet. It's not just a CYA thing. They've got to be given the time to investigate and handle their own problems before it gets broadcast to the world.

[billvon 3,076]

>you don't know what happened before that video . . .

You seem to; you refer to him as "this marine/hero."

>And remember regardless of whether or not his is right or wrong in this
> situation, he still volunteered to put himself in harms way so you don't
> have to.

And will be revered by some no matter what the outcome of the hearing, at least until he runs for public office. Then he will be a war criminal.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

And will be revered by some no matter what the outcome of the hearing, at least until he runs for public office. Then he will be a war criminal.

Do you think he deserves a Silver Star? Kerry got one for similar actions. Why not this guy.

[GQ_jumper 4]

In my mind everyone over there is a hero, people make mistakes, and sometimes the wrong decisions(please don't take this as me referring to what that marine did as a mistake or wrong decision, i still support what he did), but just because one bad thing happened that doesn't erase all of the other good things that have been done.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[billvon 3,076]

>Do you think he deserves a Silver Star?

I don't know what he did other than this. If he saved a bunch of of his fellow soldiers from near-certain death - he might well deserve one. If he was completely undistinguished, he probably doesn't.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

but just because one bad thing happened that doesn't erase all of the other good things that have been done.

You know what is sad though.... In many peoples mind, one bad thing does erase all the good. Many people have the view that 1 civilian casualty means the battle wasn't worth it.
Look how far we as a nation have come over the last 60 years.
We advance technology in weapons for many reasons, and one of those reasons in to minimise loss of innocent life. We are compassionate even during war. But many people don't see that. THe see our soldiers a murdering puppets and the US as an evil country.... It is sad IMO.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[78RATS 0]

Quote

On the tape, the Marine is clearly heard saying, "He's faking he's dead. He's faking he's dead." He said that right before he shot the insurgent. That statement shows the Marine thought the man was a danger.

All right, I'll say it. I would have done the same thing.

Rat for Life - Fly till I die
When them stupid ass bitches ask why

[pajarito 0]

Quote

Quote

On the tape, the Marine is clearly heard saying, "He's faking he's dead. He's faking he's dead." He said that right before he shot the insurgent. That statement shows the Marine thought the man was a danger.

All right, I'll say it. I would have done the same thing.

Hmmmm....
Someone in our position shouldn't second guess either way. We weren't there. However, since we are anyway, I would not have shot unless I saw or suspected a weapon and felt threatened. Given that I feared for my life and felt threatened and even if I turned out to be wrong and there wasn’t a weapon, it would still be prudent to cap the guy and fully justifiable. I would have felt like my life or the lives of my troops were in danger. I’m not taking that chance with one of my own. This isn’t COPS on TV in NY. It’s combat. Otherwise, I would have flex-cuffed the guy and treated any life threatening wounds, if I had the time and my life was not otherwise endangered. I wouldn't have shot even if I thought the guy had booby trapped his body, though. It would might have gone off and injured me or one of my troops. I would keep eyes on the guy, back away and get my troops out of blast range, and get my translator to get the guy to roll over. Then, he’d be taken POW. That's just me and I'm not judging this guy. I sincerely hope it was a good shoot. We won’t know until they investigate and all the details come out. We shouldn’t have seen this footage in the first place and shouldn’t even be talking about it at this point.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>Do you think he deserves a Silver Star?

I don't know what he did other than this. If he saved a bunch of of his fellow soldiers from near-certain death - he might well deserve one. If he was completely undistinguished, he probably doesn't.

***Patrolling the Bay Hap River, Kerry and his crew discovered they were about to be ambushed by a Viet Cong soldier who had just popped up at the shoreline with a loaded rocket launcher in his hands. With the VC about to fire, Kerry crew mate Thomas Bellodeau shot and wounded the attacker, saving the entire boat.

Only then did Kerry leap to the shore to chase the wounded enemy down - finishing him off behind a hootch.

When critics suggested that Kerry's actions that day were something less than heroic, they were hooted down by the press.

Certainly the as-yet-unnamed Marine in Fallujah deserves, if not the Silver Star, the same slack the press cut Kerry.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Patrolling the Bay Hap River, Kerry and his crew discovered they were about to be ambushed by a Viet Cong soldier who had just popped up at the shoreline with a loaded rocket launcher in his hands. With the VC about to fire, Kerry crew mate Thomas Bellodeau shot and wounded the attacker, saving the entire boat.

Only then did Kerry leap to the shore to chase the wounded enemy down - finishing him off behind a hootch.

When critics suggested that Kerry's actions that day were something less than heroic, they were hooted down by the press.

Certainly the as-yet-unnamed Marine in Fallujah deserves, if not the Silver Star, the same slack the press cut Kerry.

I'm getting a strange sensation of Deja Vu!
Wasn't that written last night?
Anyone seen Juanesky?

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[Zenister 0]

As you put, "I hate to break it to you" but I realize the future of modern warfare includes the development of high tech optics which will allow real-time footage of each soldier. I think this is fantastic and a great idea for command and control purposes for the military. I think it is a terrible idea for the media to have such ready access to this battlefield information.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

not me... there maybe extenuating circumstances but the weight of the evidence so far (the video and statements after) are against him...he might not have 'intended to' but he clearly made a mistake, he has an uphill battle to prove his actions were justified....

So you're all for judging before knowing all the facts?
Ok...

no i'm not judging anyone, anymore than those who are screaming "it was justified, give him the benefit of doubt"... I’m making an evaluation based on the limited information available.. as more information is presented the evaluation may change, but it doesn’t look good for him so far….

Quote

I'd just like to remind everybody of one thing while you all argue the fate of this marine(Hero). He is a citizen of the United States, a country where one is innocent until proven guilty. give him the benefit of the doubt, you don't know what happened before that video, you don't know what his rules of engagement were, and what firefight lead up to that situation. Let the powers that be decide his fate. And remember regardless of whether or not his is right or wrong in this situation, he still volunteered to put himself in harms way so you don't have to. So while your sitting in your home in front of your computer completely safe bashing this young mans reputation, he is ou there fighting for you.

sorry but i dont want anyone 'fighting for me' who is incapable of NOT engaging an unarmed combatant, and who [I]appears[/I] to execute with such callous disregard, the US military does not teach such values and if they are becoming common to the soldiers engaged in the current conflict, we are in a great deal of trouble.....

he isnt a Hero. He is a soldier, or more specifically a Marine... one who may or may not have made a very bad judgment call... the evidence (as presented so far) weighs heavily against him...i suppose those of you screaming 'give him the benefit of doubt' will also be clamoring for his release IF/when the investigation shows his actions to be unlawful?? Hero? Who is prejudging now??

i put myself in harms way the help HIM do his job properly, EVERY individual in service of the US and the US military is expected to conduct themselves professionally, in a manner that best reflects the morals and discipline trained by the US military.. of course mistakes DO happen, and soldiers are accountable for their mistakes even when stressed, tired and under fire… just like anyone else…..

… as a soldier would you care to elaborate on a circumstance where you believe you’d be justified in shooting an unarmed opponent in the back of the head (as all evidence we have to date shows)

i know people who ‘feel threatened’ by the mere fact that i habitually carry a pocket knife... it doesnt justify any action they take against me...FEELING threatened and BEING threatened are different animals.. Professional soldiers are expected to know the difference and exercise good judgment even or rather ESPECIALLY in the face of enemy fire and adverse conditions….

If the investigation shows his actions to be unlawful, are you still going to call him “Hero”??

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

• Quote

[pajarito 0]

Quote

to bad.. once it exists it WILL be exploited.. in the near future, every action by the majority of soldiers will be scrutinized post conflict for AAR and war crime purposes... this WILL become a fact of military life, one that modern soldiers will have to learn to deal with and to modify/adjust behaviors, that while combat effective, may constitute war crimes when under review..

Like I said, that's great. However, it doesn't need to be a live feed to CNN.